Rural Poverty in Sudan A case Study of Rashad Province, South Kordofan State

Abstract:

The main objective of the study is to analyze and describe the extent of rural
poverty and poverty situation among rural population in Rashad Province, South
Kordofan State and identifying the major causes of poverty, beside the ability of the poor
groups to cope with it. The study also aimed to study problems and constraints that
facing house hold heads to improve their standards of living.
Primary and secondary data were used, primary data collected through personal
questionnaire of household heads, interviewing of local leaders and officers. Simple
random sampling had been followed to select the sample size of 175 respondents (house
hold heads) from the four localities. Statistical analysis techniques such as percentage,
mean, simple correlation coefficient, step multiple regression, poverty measures, head
count index, poverty gap, the poverty severity, and Gini Coefficient, T. Test paired
sample statistics were used to assess the complexity of problems and constraints facing
house hold heads.
The results of the study indicated that, the socio-economic characteristics of the
respondents are that, the majority of them falls at the productive age group, less than 60
years old representing 70.9 percent. The average family size was 7.9 members per
household. About 60 percent of the respondents were illiterate and 79 percent of them,
the farming was the main occupation. The annual total income of 45 percent of the
respondents range between DS 50000 and DS 100,000.
The results indicated that, about 95 percent of the houses were built from straw or
straw with wall mode, with poor sanitation and amenities. More than half of the
respondents owned livestock, and 75 percent cultivated less than 5 feddan. Few of them
owned productive assets less than quarter. Also, the results indicated that, more than 91
percent of the respondents, income was below the poverty line. The poverty gap ranged
between 46 and 51 percent. Although the poverty is severe about 69.7 percentages of the
iii
respondents were considered the poorest. The Gini Coefficient (0.31) expressed the
variation in the distribution of income between the poorest.
Different coping mechanisms practiced by household heads or the community to
cope with poverty. Remittance in kind or monetary assistance from family members
received by 17.1 percent of the respondents. Zakat chamber provided assistance for 30
percent of the respondents. Non-governmental organizations provided services and
assistance like hand pumps, education, improved latrine, immunization for 80 percent of
the total house hold heads.
Other coping practices were done by the family members, example reducing
food and clothing expenditures for 92 percent of the respondents. Most of the
respondents 54 percent used wild food to substitute grain during food shortages. Others
were selling assets to earn money at different times of the year. Female headed
household and spouse of the respondents produced many types of handcrafts or practicing
many activities to increase family income. Communal participation in many activities as
effective social solidarity, nafir in weeding, Harvesting food crops, building houses and
digging seasonal wells, sharing money invents and death and other activities.
Major problems and constraints facing household heads are sickness problems.
The lack of drinking water, lack of credit, low prices of livestock, and lack of education.
The study provided some recommendation, but the most important, one is that,
provision of sustainable integrated development in the study area and introducing women
in the process of development. Maintenance and construction of infrastructural services
in the sectors of health, education, water and communication etc. Further studies are
recommended for studying poverty and women, war, environmental degradation, causes
of relative poverty beside, suggestion for taking poverty situation